plytho wrote:Reminder: (because I forget about it myself) scum have daychat in this game so they are coordinating as we speak (or as they speak ). So I assume tells through interactions look different then they do with nightchat.

Thank you for the informative reminder that you don’t have chat!

Yeah, but seriously, in the one nightless game I played (Dark Tower), scum completely outplayed town so I guess I'm looking for strategy tips?

@Peaceful Whale: if you have a bit of time you should browse this topic. You can find a very good example of what 'wine' could be right in the first post at the beginning of the LINGO section, under the header WIFOM. It contains a lot of other useful stuff as well.

After rereading the the posts again, Bessie and znrick are off my scum list. Moody has moved down. And I'm watching plytho. Just a little. I feel like his mention of daychat is a little off. At first Bessie's reaction was what I thought. But then I realized this could be scum trying to be more townie.

heuristically_alone wrote:What is it about your content that makes yours less useless than his?

I never claimed my game was any better, but analysing my own content doesn't get us anywhere.

I'm trying to figure out what I think about LaserGuy. He seems to be playing exactly as usual, which according to what he was in most of his games would make him scum. But most of my experience of his "usual" was in the one game we shared, which was Bin Chicken (there weren't any others, were there?), and he was town in that. For now I am seeing him as townie.

bessie wrote:moody7277 – everything he has posted so far entirely fits with his meta, which I usually read as scummy, so he’s not deliberately trying to counter his meta and present himself as townie. Therefore I have a town lean on him.

This logic is just... I don't know what to say. If he looked townie he'd be scum, but he looks scummy so he's town? (Also, since when do scum try to counter their own meta? It would make more sense for scum to try to look exactly as they do when they're town.)

flicky1991 wrote:I'm trying to figure out what I think about LaserGuy. He seems to be playing exactly as usual, which according to what he was in most of his games would make him scum. But most of my experience of his "usual" was in the one game we shared, which was Bin Chicken (there weren't any others, were there?), and he was town in that. For now I am seeing him as townie.

So when you say that LaserGuy plays exactly as usual then you are referring to a single game only? Or are you comparing his playstyle to his other games as well with which you don't have experience? Please explain.

Sabrar wrote:are you comparing his playstyle to his other games as well with which you don't have experience?

Kind of this - what I mean is that I've viewed several games I wasn't playing so my overall impression of his playstyle might have some influence from the many games where he was scum. But I payed more attention in the game I was in, obviously, and LG in this game seems very similar in that game.

Then, correct me if I'm wrong, your read on him is basically 'he plays the same as he did in all of his games before, either scum or town, but because I played with him when he was town I think he's more likely to be town here as well'. Did I get it right?

No, I'm saying that the townie game is probably a bigger part of my impression of his playstyle because that is the one I played in. I haven't gone through all his games as scum to compare them to this game. I just know he's playing just like he did as town in that one. If I wanted to do a deeper analysis and wanted to compare playstyles properly, I'd look at the games where he was scum too.

If I'm going to revise my original statement to make it clearer where the disconnect between my meaning and your interpretation was (new content in italics):

flicky1991 wrote:He seems to be playing exactly as usual based on what I remember of him, which according to what he was in most of his games would make him scum. But most of my experience of his "usual" was in the one game we shared, which was Bin Chicken (there weren't any others, were there?), and he was town in that. For now I am seeing him as townie.

Does that make sense now? My gut feeling without any analysis was "he's playing as usual", but then I realised that my opinion of his "usual" would be heavily biased towards the only game we shared, so it wouldn't matter so much for a gut read by me that he has mostly been scum even though that's what most people's idea of his "usual" would come from.

LaserGuy wrote:bessie: Lots of discussion on setup, particularly with plytho and Sabrar. Doesn't feel as townie as she often does to me. Makes some partial reads that seem plausible. Would like to see some full reads. Putting as neutral.

And what is that supposed to mean? In the previous three games we played together, I was town and you were mafia. In our previous games perhaps I felt townie to you because you knew I was very likely town.

plytho wrote:Summary of my specific issues with that line:1. when I’m talking about rule #2 I’m talking about rule #2 compared to other possible tie breaking rules. So when I read “rule #2 implies 7-2” I interpret this as “more so than other tie breaking rules, rule #2 implies 7-2”

...

So you’re saying you think it’s 7-2 (or 6-2-1) despite rule #2, rather than because of it? Which is what I’ve been trying to say. Please confirm.I hope this is cleared up now

bessie wrote: Setup. Per the sign ups, simple powers, possibly some vanilla roles. Per the game specific rules, no cult. I hope rule #5 is a joke, because jester is an annoying enough role in itself. Per rule #2, tying the votes won’t stop the lynch. So I’m going to say 7-2, or 6-2-1 where independent is not anti-town. Need to think about this a little.

Try reading it now. Changed punctuation only.

Setup: - Per the sign ups, simple powers.- possibly some vanilla roles. - Per the game specific rules, no cult.

(I hope rule #5 is a joke, because jester is an annoying enough role in itself!)

-Per rule #2, tying the votes won’t stop the lynch.

So… I’m going to say 7-2? or 6-2-1 where independent is not anti-town??

plytho wrote:Yeah, but seriously, in the one nightless game I played (Dark Tower), scum completely outplayed town so I guess I'm looking for strategy tips?

I think the significance of chat (day, night, scum, mason, etc) tends to be underrated. If a mafia team has day chat, I would consider it a major, not an incidental, ability.

Advantages mafia day chat vs night chat:- Immediate advice available for newbie scum, who are usually easy to read. - No need to send hidden signals to scum partner in game thread that can be detected by town.- Can alter plans immediately, no need wait for night to discuss.- Immediate coordinated response if a townie makes a scum slip.- Coordinate in chat real-time. Really helpful in arranging that final hammer vote that will win the game.

For an example of mafia with day chat working over town (and if you have a lot of time), I suggest you read Misnomer’s Smalltown PYP. Go to the last page. SDK posted the mafia chat logs (300ish pms?) in three spoilers.

OK, now, let’s see what kind of trouble I can get myself in over this:

flicky1991 wrote:

bessie wrote:moody7277 – everything he has posted so far entirely fits with his meta, which I usually read as scummy, so he’s not deliberately trying to counter his meta and present himself as townie. Therefore I have a town lean on him.

This logic is just... I don't know what to say. If he looked townie he'd be scum, but he looks scummy so he's town? (Also, since when do scum try to counter their own meta? It would make more sense for scum to try to look exactly as they do when they're town.)

bessie's thought process, ordered:- moody can have a bit of a scummy meta at times.- I usually read moody as scum. Is this because of meta or because I really do find what I believe are scum tells in his content? I don’t know. I’d like to believe it’s the later. - moody is playing much the way he always plays. Mostly short, to the point posts, often insightful, sometimes sprinkled with witty remarks. Early reads list, concise, pulling out just what he needs in a player’s content to support his read, and mostly firm reads. - This is very townie behavior. He also plays the same way as scum.- moody was scum in X-Men. If he is scum now, perhaps he would change his behavior and adopt a different posting style to appear more townie. - No, appears similar to X-Men. He’s not concerned with “appearing” more townie. - Probably town then.

And that, newbies, is WIFOM.

Peaceful Whale, good to see you’re following along, as that is important. Your pinging of plytho (and others) is OK when it is accompanied by additional content, like here. By itself, like here, it’s usually considered active lurking. If you’re online and have time to post, how about updating your town-scum list? There’s been a lot of content since you originally posted your list, and per your recent posts, you have changed your mind on some players.

plytho wrote:Summary of my specific issues with that line:1. when I’m talking about rule #2 I’m talking about rule #2 compared to other possible tie breaking rules. So when I read “rule #2 implies 7-2” I interpret this as “more so than other tie breaking rules, rule #2 implies 7-2”

...

So you’re saying you think it’s 7-2 (or 6-2-1) despite rule #2, rather than because of it? Which is what I’ve been trying to say. Please confirm.I hope this is cleared up now

Your reading of my content is incorrect.

Ok, one more try:

bessie wrote:Try reading it now. Changed punctuation only.

Setup: - Per the sign ups, simple powers.- possibly some vanilla roles. - Per the game specific rules, no cult.

(I hope rule #5 is a joke, because jester is an annoying enough role in itself!)

-Per rule #2, tying the votes won’t stop the lynch.

So… I’m going to say 7-2? or 6-2-1 where independent is not anti-town??

Need to think about this a little.

Side note, a little became a lot, sorry about that, apparently I'm not that good at communicating

Multiple choice questions:1) In this reasoning for the setup, do you find rule #2A relevant go question 2B not relevant this was all a huge waste of time

2) rule #2 is relevant, it makes 7-2 (ever so slightly)A more likely than 6-3 I disagreeB less likely than 6-3 but not enough to tip the balance all the way to 6-3 I agree but I don't read that from your initial post

I'm sorry I keep harping on about this.

@Peaceful Whale: mafia term of the day:Tunneling: focusing on one player too much and losing track of the rest of the game because of it. (It's what I've been doing to bessie.)

EBWOP: at this point I just want to understand bessie and make myself understood. I'm aware this won't lead to a scum read and it's all a big misunderstanding but I really really want to clear this up.

I have returned. And to some excitement, too. Let's start with Sabrar.

Sabrar wrote:Re-read of LaserGuy shows nothing that screams townie to me but there are a number of red flags.

Oh this should be good.

1. Here I would expect at least a mention from town!LaserGuy on the possibility of scum or Vig killing a Jester even if then realizes that Jester is intentionally acting scummy so mafia probably won't help us in that regard.

Really now? As many others have brought up, of my last five games, I've been scum in four. The one town game I played, you were scum. None of those games included a jester, and in bin Chicken where I was town, I didn't engage in basically any setup speculation at all (eg. I didn't answer any of the hypothetical questions posed by you or jimbob). So I'm a little bit skeptical that you have such a good meta read on my town game as to be able to predict what specific information I would say about this particular type of jester on my first post of the game.

And it's not like the options you present are really interesting alternatives. If Mafia kills the Jester, it basically transposes into a 7-2 setup where mafia hit a townie. If Vig hits the Jester, it transposes to the 6-2-1 setup where we let the Jester die after D2. Though because of this, vigging the Jester is completely pointless--if we know the identity of the Jester well enough to vig them, then we know it well enough to ignore them. If we have to choose between two players to lynch and think one is the Jester, we're better off no lynching D2 and saving the vig for N3. There's no benefit whatsoever. Strategies that rely on luck or the beneficence of the mafia aren't great for town, anyway.

1. 'Instructing' the Vig to kill the Jester is a valid strategy.

No it isn't. It's pointless. The Jester dies on D3 regardless of what we do as long as we don't lynch them. Killing them with a vig just wastes the vig.

As mentioned multiple times before saying that something feels off is not particularly helpful and is in fact a way to avoid having to give concrete reads. He does it here and later doubles down here. Plus if all he found as 'off' was that plytho wasn't active lurking in his opinion then his initial comment doesn't really makes sense.

Not all I found, just all I was prepared to comment on at that point. Like you, I prefer not to disclose meta tells if I don't feel it necessary. I saw something that reminded me of plytho's scum play and found bessie's active lurking comment odd. My opinion of bessie has improved since then; my opinion of plytho has not.

3. His read on plytho is weird as he is basically putting him as scum based on a single similarity with a previous game.

Why are you defending plytho so much? Very interesting. But yes, this feels a lot like plytho scum from Shakespeare, except he's tunneling bessie instead of Gopher. Since it's likely to come up, I will mention that, unlike your weaksauce meta read of me in your point 1, I was actually on plytho's scum team in Shakespeare, and have access to a lot more information about how he actually thinks and plays as scum. But (assuming you're town and care to do so), you can probably go back and compare with D1 plytho in Dark Tower where he was solidly town to see the difference.

For someone so obsessed with logic I'm surprised your logic has failed so badly here. Scum has daychat. Therefore if Peaceful Whale is trying to signal someone here, it isn't a scum partner. Since game is newbie friendly and low bastardry, scum-town interactions are very unlikely. Ergo if PW is signaling anyone, it's town signalling town or at worst indie signalling town. If it is not signalling then it is irrelevant and can be safely ignored. It is in the best interest of town not to expose power roles, especially in D1, so it is in town's best interests to ignore this until such time as it is relevant since it may imply some townie PR interaction, and almost certainly does not imply a scum interaction. Therefore, regardless of the innocence of the questioning, it's anti town. As I already suggested. Pursuing this line of questioning is at best irrelevant, and at worst, harmful to town, so townies should not be pursuing it.

plytho wrote:LaserGuy: Still feels pretty townie to me despite this:

LaserGuy wrote:plytho: Spends a lot of time arguing with bessie about a specific point on the setup. I'll note that plytho did something very similar in Shakespeare III where he spent much of D1 arguing with jimbob about setup as well, and plytho was scum that game.

being wrong. I checked back because I didn’t remember it and in fact it was Sabrar arguing with jimbob D1. I did get into an argument with Gopher from D2 onwards but that’s what my scumhunting looks like (I was convinced he was on the rival scum team). I’ll chalk this up as misremembering for now but if you show other scummy behaviour I’ll start thinking this was malicious.

You and Sabrar had an extended and ultimately spurious conversation about whether it was correct play to policy lynch a townie with the Hated modifier. It wasn't technically setup I suppose so my mistake there.

plytho wrote:Sabrar: I’m not convinced by Sabrar’s case on LaserGuy.

And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

bessie wrote:

LaserGuy wrote:bessie: Lots of discussion on setup, particularly with plytho and Sabrar. Doesn't feel as townie as she often does to me. Makes some partial reads that seem plausible. Would like to see some full reads. Putting as neutral.

And what is that supposed to mean? In the previous three games we played together, I was town and you were mafia. In our previous games perhaps I felt townie to you because you knew I was very likely town.

Fair point. Though even in my scum games I have mostly read you as town for legitimate reasons, but I can't deny that there's probably a bit of bias there. This is a moot point anyway, because I'm pretty sure you're town now.

bessie wrote:More reactions/responses.

Hi town!bessie Glad I finally get to play a game on the same team as you.

I have a feeling that I've seen this happen before. Was it jimbob in Dark Tower, bessie?

plytho wrote:EBWOP: at this point I just want to understand bessie and make myself understood. I'm aware this won't lead to a scum read and it's all a big misunderstanding but I really really want to clear this up.

And if it's just a misunderstanding that is completely irrelevant to what's actually happening, why are you investing so many words in it? I didn't think you were active lurking at the start of the game, but this is practically the definition of active lurking.

Good luck with that! If you have any success, my husband would appreciate some pointers. He’s been working on that puzzle for years. Pretty sure there are a few pieces missing though.

Pffffftttttt...Ok. This.

plytho wrote:Multiple choice questions:1) In this reasoning for the setup, do you find rule #2A relevant go question 2B not relevant this was all a huge waste of time

A. Yea I get to continue.

plytho wrote:2) rule #2 is relevant, it makes 7-2 (ever so slightly)A more likely than 6-3 I disagreeB less likely than 6-3 but not enough to tip the balance all the way to 6-3 I agree but I don't read that from your initial post

A. Ok, we disagree. Now what?

plytho wrote:@Peaceful Whale: mafia term of the day:Tunneling: focusing on one player too much and losing track of the rest of the game because of it. (It's what I've been doing to bessie.)

Tunneling! Well here's something on which I have an opinion! I do it a lot, almost every game.

My tunneling can be annoyingly extreme. See: -bessie vs jimbobmacdoodle, D1 in The Dark Tower (scum killed me for it in this one because once I start I will never let it go)-bessie vs Carlington, D2-D3 in Diablo Mafia (wow, extreme case)-bessie vs kalira, D1 in Secret Santa 2016*More examples (from a large pool) available upon request.

When I’m tunneling, I’m town. (Note: this is really by default, as I’m usually town. I skimmed WoT1 and I wasn’t doing the extreme tunneling I often do in WoT1.) And I’m not only town, I’m townie. I was never a serious lynch candidate in any of those games. So something about my tunneling/scumhunting must have looked natural, even if it wasn’t correct.

I’ve had it done to me (see Shakespeare III, D2). By scum. And quite frankly, it felt as artificial as hell (sorry LaserGuy, nothing personal).

Kinda like in this game.

flicky1991 wrote:Sabrar vs bessie - Seeing the debates between the two of them, I feel this is pretty normal for them. They seem to have had a thing going for a couple of games. Might tell us nothing - if town/town they are debating as usual, if town/scum then the scum side is keeping the debate going to make it look good, and if scum/scum then they know their reputations and are keeping it up (although I'd be very impressed if that were so).

Note: Substitute plytho for Sabrar.

Bessie’s thought process, ordered (because we gotta do it this way now).1. Is bessie-plytho debate town/town? I feel this has gone past the point where it is town/town. Eliminated. 2. Is bessie-plytho debate town/scum – Possible.3. Is bessie-plytho debate scum/scum – Possible.4. There are two possible options.5. I know my alignment, so one of the two options is eliminated.

Vote: plytho

LaserGuy, I need some time to think through your post before commenting. Except for this:

LaserGuy wrote:Hi town!bessie Glad I finally get to play a game on the same team as you.

Is this a game read or a meta read? Because you know how I love being read as townie for meta reasons.

LaserGuy wrote:So I'm a little bit skeptical that you have such a good meta read on my town game

This is not a meta-read on town!LaserGuy, this is an expectation from town!anyone where 'anyone' denotes a player who has shown an above average interest in the game.

LaserGuy wrote:Though because of this, vigging the Jester is completely pointless--if we know the identity of the Jester well enough to vig them, then we know it well enough to ignore them.

Your whole point is if we know who is Jester we shouldn't Vig them. I agree. However we obviously won't know it for certain, so 'asking' the Vig to get rid of a scummy-looking player lets us get rid of an antitown role without having to suffer the roleblock or needing to argue about it again on D2 if they were Jester. If they were scum then even better.

LaserGuy wrote:Not all I found, just all I was prepared to comment on at that point. Like you, I prefer not to disclose meta tells if I don't feel it necessary.

Then this applies to you as well. You are allowed to mention that you are basing your read on meta-reasons without having to disclose them (like I did multiple times in both this game and previous ones).

LaserGuy wrote:Why are you defending plytho so much? Very interesting.

I didn't comment on plytho, I commented on your extremely weak case on him. This is deflection.

moody said that the first thing he thought of when he saw the 'signal' was Lyncher. bessie agrees with him. I don't but that's irrelevant. You are basing your argument on the assumption that it must be a 'good' signal when in theory it could just be a hook to see who the target is. Lyncher is usually anti-town, so catching him is a townie thing to do. But you're dismissing any possibility that does not fit your pov.

LaserGuy wrote:And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

What a disingenuous comment. It implies much without actually adding anything to the discussion. Let's break it down for the sake of our new players.- LaserGuy is insinuating a {plytho, Sabrar} scum-team (probably trying to sheep* bessie along the way)- he implies that we are deliberately arguing about some of our scum-reads to distance ourselves while in reality looking to mislynch flicky- he conveniently omits the fact that his biggest scum-read was flicky and he even voted for him- he conveniently omits the fact that I've since reconsidered my read on flicky

Classic example of throwing around accusations without spelling it out (otherwise people might find the huge holes in them).

LaserGuy wrote:Though even in my scum games I have mostly read you as town for legitimate reasons

You had her as neutral in Dark Tower. You thought she was scum in Shakespeare. So no.

LaserGuy wrote:I have a feeling that I've seen this happen before. Was it jimbob in Dark Tower, bessie?

Care to explain this comment? Again with the sheeping.

*to sheep: blindly follow someone. Occasional scum-tactic to attach themselves to a very townie looking person because they hope that s/he will read them as town in return for agreeing with them.

plytho wrote:EBWOP: at this point I just want to understand bessie and make myself understood. I'm aware this won't lead to a scum read and it's all a big misunderstanding but I really really want to clear this up.

And if it's just a misunderstanding that is completely irrelevant to what's actually happening, why are you investing so many words in it? I didn't think you were active lurking at the start of the game, but this is practically the definition of active lurking.

I posted that read a while ago. Back then my 2 points against bessie were the surprising active lurker comment and the fact that she wasn't responding to that question. Wait, actually reading my list again: I'm not even using that there! I'm talking about the active lurker comment and her meta read on heury. I'm not saying it wasn't a part of my read but at that point I was still waiting for an answer so I didn't mention it.

Well, maybe it isn't completely irrelevant. But mostly, when there's a misunderstanding I want that cleared up. I can end an argument on 'agree to disagree' but not on 'agree to misunderstand'. That's why I kept asking people if my point was clear. As I said before I went into "someone's wrong on the internet mode".

I'm aware that this is close to active lurking but I think I'm putting out enough content on other players too?

I’m quite frustrated with this whole thing now.Here's how I expected things going:1 I post 'good question'2 bessie answers with her answer from the quote below3 we discuss, make our respective points and come to a conclusion4 this does or does not point towards scum!bessie trying to mislead town

What happened instead:1 I post 'good question'2 bessie doesn't understand what I mean3 I fail to explainrepeat 10 times4 bessie answers with the quote below5 plytho is frustrated about his inability to communicate, doesn't find any scum tells in this ordeal

bessie wrote:

plytho wrote:Multiple choice questions:1) In this reasoning for the setup, do you find rule #2A relevant go question 2B not relevant this was all a huge waste of time

A. Yea I get to continue.

plytho wrote:2) rule #2 is relevant, it makes 7-2 (ever so slightly)A more likely than 6-3 I disagreeB less likely than 6-3 but not enough to tip the balance all the way to 6-3 I agree but I don't read that from your initial post

A. Ok, we disagree. Now what?

Now we’re finally talking about the same thing!I’m so happy you answered that! This has been my point all along! We disagree about this very specific issue and I’ve been trying to explain my position on this and hoping to hear yours.

@all: did anyone get that this was my point?

@bessie: if you read back you’ll see me try to defend my position on this point in just about every post about this. I’m interested in your counterarguments but I don’t think they’re too relevant in thread, feel free to talk about it in Gojoe later.

bessie wrote:Bessie’s thought process, ordered (because we gotta do it this way now).1. Is bessie-plytho debate town/town? I feel this has gone past the point where it is town/town. Eliminated. 2. Is bessie-plytho debate town/scum – Possible.3. Is bessie-plytho debate scum/scum – Possible.4. There are two possible options.5. I know my alignment, so one of the two options is eliminated.

Vote: plytho

Funny, because I really think it’s a town-town misunderstanding now At the beginning I thought you may be scum trying to deflect answering my question but this feels like a genuine misunderstanding now. ha ha ha (music)

LaserGuy wrote:So I'm a little bit skeptical that you have such a good meta read on my town game

This is not a meta-read on town!LaserGuy, this is an expectation from town!anyone where 'anyone' denotes a player who has shown an above average interest in the game.

This is based on a whole host of assumptions that seem unwarranted. Do we have a vig? I don't know. Do we have a scummy-enough player to consider vigging? I don't know. Does the vig agree? I don't know. Do we even have a Jester? I don't know. I still don't know the answers to any of these, nevermind having the answers in time for my very first post of the game. I responded to what I saw and what I knew at the time, which was that the game setup included a rule for a particularly anti-town Jester mechanic. Yes, it's possible that such a scenario could be relevant, but discussing such low probability events at the start of D1 is not really helpful. If people had been interested in pursuing a more detailed discussion on what strategies town might employ to deal with a Jester, well, then some of the topics that you suggest might have come up.

Sabrar wrote:

LaserGuy wrote:Why are you defending plytho so much? Very interesting.

I didn't comment on plytho, I commented on your extremely weak case on him. This is deflection.

I didn't make a case on plytho. I made a read, same as I did everyone else. plytho's read I happened to base mostly on meta (which I stand by), and I gave him a scum lean. Why do you think I was making a case on him? And weren't you just telling me that you don't have a problem with people using meta to justify reads? Yes, it wasn't a strong read... he felt a bit scummy based on what I had reviewed in Shakespeare, so I gave him a scum lean. Your argument here, on both your points 2 and 3, basically comes down to "I don't like your read on plytho", which is why I say you're defending him. Your point 1 is fluff. Your point 4 is just wrong.

moody said that the first thing he thought of when he saw the 'signal' was Lyncher. bessie agrees with him. I don't but that's irrelevant. You are basing your argument on the assumption that it must be a 'good' signal when in theory it could just be a hook to see who the target is. Lyncher is usually anti-town, so catching him is a townie thing to do. But you're dismissing any possibility that does not fit your pov.

I don't particularly care who agrees (though I honestly doubt it's a lyncher, and I doubt PW would be playing in the manner that you describe). Role fishing is anti-town, and speculative rolefishing hoping to catch an unknown indie is not a good reason to risk outing townie power roles. Hunting for indies is distracting from hunting for scum. I'm also amused that you have never reached the much more logical (though wrong) conclusion about why I might be making a point about this.

Sabrar wrote:

LaserGuy wrote:And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

What a disingenuous comment. It implies much without actually adding anything to the discussion. Let's break it down for the sake of our new players.- LaserGuy is insinuating a {plytho, Sabrar} scum-team (probably trying to sheep* bessie along the way)- he implies that we are deliberately arguing about some of our scum-reads to distance ourselves while in reality looking to mislynch flicky

My way of writing it is much more concise and gets the point across just as well.

Sabrar wrote:- he conveniently omits the fact that his biggest scum-read was flicky and he even voted for him

I didn't mention it because it wasn't relevant. If you and plytho are scum then flicky is almost certainly town regardless of how he's played so far.

Sabrar wrote:- he conveniently omits the fact that I've since reconsidered my read on flicky

You said you felt "a bit better" about him and voted for me instead. If you're reading him as Town, you never said so. What you did say is sufficiently vacuous that it doesn't preclude you voting for him later if you can't rally a lynch for me.

Sabrar wrote:

LaserGuy wrote:I have a feeling that I've seen this happen before. Was it jimbob in Dark Tower, bessie?

LaserGuy wrote:Why are you defending plytho so much? Very interesting. But yes, this feels a lot like plytho scum from Shakespeare, except he's tunneling bessie instead of Gopher. Since it's likely to come up, I will mention that, unlike your weaksauce meta read of me in your point 1, I was actually on plytho's scum team in Shakespeare, and have access to a lot more information about how he actually thinks and plays as scum.

So you remember that, when I was tunneling on Gopher and you were tunneling on bessie, I was absolutely convinced Gopher was scum like you were convinced bessie was scum.Using bessie’s words:

bessie wrote:I’m not always correct, but I’m always sincere

LaserGuy wrote:

plytho wrote:Sabrar: I’m not convinced by Sabrar’s case on LaserGuy.

And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

bessie isn't my scummiest read, flicky is, hence my vote. If you still think I'm reading bessie as scum you haven't been reading my posts. I disagreed with bessie on one specific point and took three days to explain that. My initial scum read referred to other things and if I thought bessie was scummy because of that specific point I would have mentioned that. Saying stuff like "yeah, I'm convinced bessie is scum because..." I didn't because I wasn't.

LaserGuy wrote:This is based on a whole host of assumptions that seem unwarranted.

Now you're just arguing against something I've never said. I only expected some comment on the possibility of Vig/scum shooting the Jester, not a complete argument about if it's a good idea or not. The fact that at this point we're arguing about the specific scenarios does not mean that when I made my initial comment I expected the same.

LaserGuy wrote:I didn't make a case on plytho. I made a read, same as I did everyone else.

To me they are the same at this point. You find him scummy because of reasons, it doesn't matter what we call it.

LaserGuy wrote:Role fishing is anti-town

Except when it's not. I can search for examples when I did it as Town if you want.

LaserGuy wrote:Hunting for indies is distracting from hunting for scum.

Then you're doing it wrong. I've argued multiple times in the past that these are not 'distractions' as no-one forces you to abandon the other issues.

And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

bessie isn't my scummiest read, flicky is, hence my vote. If you still think I'm reading bessie as scum you haven't been reading my posts. I disagreed with bessie on one specific point and took three days to explain that. My initial scum read referred to other things and if I thought bessie was scummy because of that specific point I would have mentioned that. Saying stuff like "yeah, I'm convinced bessie is scum because..." I didn't because I wasn't.

LaserGuy wrote:Hunting for indies is distracting from hunting for scum.

Then you're doing it wrong. I've argued multiple times in the past that these are not 'distractions' as no-one forces you to abandon the other issues.

This depends on the amount of time you have. I had enough time for my tunneling, but if I had less time I probably would have had to drop that because I wouldn't have enough time to read the rest. So it's not distracting if you have loads of time and energy, it is distracting if you don't and spend your resources on hunting for indies over hunting for scum.

LaserGuy wrote:

plytho wrote:

LaserGuy wrote:

plytho wrote:Sabrar: I’m not convinced by Sabrar’s case on LaserGuy.

And Sabrar doesn't agree with you on bessie. Fortunately you both have flicky as your second scummiest read and will reluctantly agree to him as a compromise lynch.

bessie isn't my scummiest read, flicky is, hence my vote. If you still think I'm reading bessie as scum you haven't been reading my posts. I disagreed with bessie on one specific point and took three days to explain that. My initial scum read referred to other things and if I thought bessie was scummy because of that specific point I would have mentioned that. Saying stuff like "yeah, I'm convinced bessie is scum because..." I didn't because I wasn't.

While I didn't actually call her town yet, I was starting to think it was all a misunderstanding here and I said I wasn't adamant about her being scum here. In that post where I said I could vote for her I was under the impression that bessie was avoiding my questions and figured a vote might pressure her into answering.

plytho wrote:This depends on the amount of time you have. I had enough time for my tunneling, but if I had less time I probably would have had to drop that because I wouldn't have enough time to read the rest. So it's not distracting if you have loads of time and energy, it is distracting if you don't and spend your resources on hunting for indies over hunting for scum.

Obviously indie-hunting shouldn't be a substitute for scum-hunting but if you don't have time for both you can ignore the former and concentrate on the latter. That's what I mean when I say it shouldn't be a distraction if you're not the one to bring it up.

Flicky: I still feel like there’s not a lot of content from flicky. I’d really like to see him make a reads list because I have no idea where he’s at now with his reads. He has a vote on moody for low content. But despite multiple people mentioning he needs to provide more himself (and 2 votes), he hasn’t. Feels like stalling to me. Remains on the scummy end.@flicky: please provide a reads list and a town-to-scum list.

Heury: I kind of like his content in general, but there are a couple of weird questions that make him look suspicious to me here and here.Also:

heuristically_alone wrote:It has been a crazy couple of days but I should have time later today to give some reads and address a couple points I made at me.

I don’t know from which timezone you sent this but I’m assuming ‘today’ has passed by now?Scummy side of neutral.

LaserGuy: As I said before, I like how he’s playing, asking, prodding, pushing people. His last post feels like town LaserGuy making a case against Sabrar. I disagree with it but I think it’s coming from a townie place.

Moody: lurker, really needs to contribute more and update that reads list.

Peaceful whale: Seems to be asking the right questions. Looks like newbie town. Asks a lot of questions in-thread that might otherwise be answered by a chat partner. Town

Sabrar:

bessie wrote:Sabrar – I think it’s interesting that so many people are claiming Sabrar is so hard to read on D1. I’ve found the opposite to be true more often than not. When Sabrar is scum, someone (not everyone, but someone) usually has a pretty strong scum read on him D1.

Sabrar was scum on my first D1 and I totally read him as town because of his large amount of decent content. This is where I’m coming from when I say he’s hard to read. I’m not buying Sabrar’s read on LaserGuy, I don’t think there’s enough to make a case. At this point I don’t think it’s scum!Sabrar trying to mislynch LaserGuy though. Neutral

Znirk: Hasn’t posted anything since I said this in my last read:

plytho wrote:Znirk: I have no problem his reads post (unlike others), it’s a different style but I like that. I would like to see Znirk interact more with people though.

Which was a while ago. Starting to look lurky. Scummy side of neutral

Bessie: saving ‘the bess’ for last. I think I’ve explained my read on bessie already: I thought I noticed some possible scum tells early on (the early active lurker comment, and something about that setup spec didn’t sound right, particularly the refusal to respond). I figured I’d push the setup spec, figuring I may or may not get a scum tell out of it. Yeah, that didn’t happen. So, I don’t think scum!bessie, aware of what I was looking for, made me run in circles here. It’s most likely town!bessie not understanding what I meant. Or, much less likely, scum!bessie not understanding what I meant. The rest of her content is standard town bessie although I agree with Sabrar that this is a weird train of thought. Neutral-Townie

Also, Znrick hasn't posted much but he has posted a very complete read list... i think he'll post more near the end of (my) day. Hopefully.

I guess I should do a reads list... I'll work on it, I've got a lot going on. ( I'm just lazy)

So far I'm looking at Moody, flicky, and plytho. Plytho and Sabar may be chat buddies I first thought, but then I thought otherwise. (I can't really read Sabar, they he always feels townie to me).

I know who I'm voting for lynch currently, but when I do my read list it may change becuase I'll have reread all of the posts.

Should I start to entertain the idea 3 mafia? Plytho's been pretty vocal about that. I think this could potentially be problematic if we don't lynch correctly today. Especially with rule #2... even if mafia outs themselves saving a teammate they would then get a kill later in night. However we probably have some one shots. They would be able to shoot mafia right?

So far all I know about scum hunting is just looking at what people post and trying to judge if it's scummy or not. Plytho mentioned voting someone to put pressure on them. Is that a good idea, or will it make that person watch their moves better. I'm waiting to voice my suspicions hoping that they'll slip up. Later I'll post my reads. That will have my suspicions.

My meta for future reference

Spoiler:

cemper93 wrote:Your meta appears to be "just writes whatever is on his mind and doesn't remember what happened more than five hours ago"

Peaceful Whale wrote:I know who I'm voting for lynch currently, but when I do my read list it may change becuase I'll have reread all of the posts.

Like bessie says: more talk is better. If you let us know who you'd vote for now and why, you can still change your mind after your reads list, but we see more of your reasoning, which is better for town.

Peaceful Whale wrote:Should I start to entertain the idea 3 mafia? Plytho's been pretty vocal about that. I think this could potentially be problematic if we don't lynch correctly today. Especially with rule #2... even if mafia outs themselves saving a teammate they would then get a kill later in night. However we probably have some one shots. They would be able to shoot mafia right?

Yeah, no, I don't think there's 3 mafia. Precisely because it would make things very tough for town if we mislynch today. That's not what I was talking about, but I clearly was communicating badly. Without strong evidence pointing to 3 mafia, I assume there's 2.

Peaceful Whale wrote:Plytho mentioned voting someone to put pressure on them. Is that a good idea, or will it make that person watch their moves better.

It usually gets a reaction and that helps generate content. However it needs to be done early in the day so that actual discussion can occur and you shouldn't just vote somebody without any justification.

1. Sabrar- D1 Sabar is impossible to read. I did think he was either scum team or had a chat with plytho becuase it looked like they had a pretty coordinated attack(tunneling?) on Bessie. However Sabar back out first, and then plytho was still confused. So maybe not.

2. plytho - Has been a help to town with scum reads. However he did push on Bessie, and I feel he may not understand what Bessie was saying still, and I think he realized what he was doing could be seen as scummy tunneling, mentioned it (WIFOM?), and then made sure every one knew it was a mistake, I feel like town would have just moved on. And then this I missed, but huery pointed it out.

heuristically_alone wrote:

plytho wrote:Yeah, but seriously, in the one nightless game I played (Dark Tower), scum completely outplayed town so I guess I'm looking for strategy tips?

This seems rather winey to me.

I agree with him, but not sure if it was an attempt to appear noobie. Also, that question mark makes me read it kinda weird.

3. moody7277- He's been neutral, but his lack of content pings me. I'm not sure if he's a lurker. On the scummy side of my imaginary list.

4.Peaceful Whale - not so noobie anymore! (I hope)

5. Heuristically_alone - hasn't posted much, kinda like znrick and moody. Again, I really don't know what to make of it. Role fished once, caught on to what may have been bread crumbing by Peaceful Whale

6. Znirk - Kinda like Moody, with his lack of posts, but I'm putting him on the townie side of neutral.

7. LaserGuy - I'd group him win Sabar and Bessie, guys I can't really read. Though I'd bet he was town, he has acted a little weird sometime, but not enough to be "scummy" in my book.

8. bessie - Attacked by Sabar and plytho. Has posted a lot, mainly defending themselves. I believe she's town, thinks PW is and indie. I feel like they haven't scum hunted as much. (Pause to glare at plytho and Sabar for taking up all of Bessie's time) and she's on my top townie list.

9. flicky1991. Some lack of content like Moody, but has been online a lot. I bet flicky's too busy with all of his/her fans. But is on pretty low down on the imaginary scum list.

If I had to bet who was town/scum...

TOWN: Bessie, PW, znrick, Lazerguy huery

moody ( more neutral than scummy) FlickyPlytho

I don't trust myself to judge Sabar, though he feels townie to me.

My meta for future reference

Spoiler:

cemper93 wrote:Your meta appears to be "just writes whatever is on his mind and doesn't remember what happened more than five hours ago"